What have the conservatives won for the last 40 years? Race and gender issues are more entrenched than ever in both discourse and policy. Now gay issues too, in way less time than 40 years, at that. In all three, even choosing the wrong turns of phrase without disagreeing with the liberal consensus is instant political death.

These issues remained on the discussion agenda due to the advances made during the '60s and '70s. But let's face it, in order for these minorities to continue to progress, they felt the need to swing conservative on many things that did not reach their level of progress prior to the conservative takeover of the '80s. The gays adopted an assimilationist agenda to replace their once more radical/revolutionary agenda, and youth rights and progressive discussions of youth sexuality were knocked completely back. Moral panics rose again and thrived during this political environment. Liberals themselves adopted conservative attitudes and sought to be complicit with the conservative mindset in many ways, quickly ceasing to be true liberals as most of them were in the '70s and now becoming what the refer to as "centrists." The liberals' adoption of the PC mindset was an act of desperation to keep what groups they had already achieved progress for in the line of support, but to do so they adopted many conservative attitudes, simply reversing them to attack white male heterosexuals. The organized misandrists did precisely this thing. They become reverse-conservatives posing as "progressives."

War and imperialism issues got associated with Reagan and thus with conservatism because of the Reagan administration inclusion of many imperialists within its ranks. But the war party has always spanned across party and ideological lines. WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam were Democratic wars. Iraq is not (though still it passed unopposed by the Democrats; and though Syria certainly is: may I remind you that Bush Sr had Assad Sr on board in 1991?) but looking at history from the exception rather than the rule is more disinformative than informative.

Yes, because we both know war is largely an economic issue that the system all but requires to remain feasible. But it's the conservative mindset, not liberal policies, that call for specifically pre-emptive war. The Democrats of today are largely "centrists" who are totally in favor of the idea of building empire, so they no longer need any pretense.

And if you mean the "Wall Street wing" those are, indeed, conservatives who capitulated. Not to Carter or Clinton. To FDR. The true conservative policy would be to let those who fail, fail. As every conservative knew before they unsuccessfully tried to "stay relevant" in the face of the FDR landslides. And still won almost nothing until the Goldwater revolt.

And the conservatives in America have successfully undermined the great majority of the measures FDR established with the New Deal, including popularizing de-regulation, and striving to chip away at other measures, such as privatizing social security and preventing the establishment of a single-payer health care system. And a liberally dominated Supreme Court certainly wouldn't have voted in favor of the Citizens United measure. College and credit card debt, as well as the speculator market, grew to a huge extent during the past 35+ years of the conservative dominance of economic policies. So-called "liberal" politicians can talk progressive on certain social issues, and advancements for those minority groups now supported by mainstream liberals continue gradually... but they likely would have occurred much faster and more extensively if the liberal era of the '70s had not come to a crashing end with the Thatcher/Reagan era.

No, Dissy. Conservatives have capitulated on EVERYTHING to Libruls and Progressives. If you are not witnessing anything closer to Socialism, it isn't because Progressives are cowards. It is because they are *not* Socialists.

The conservatives have capitulated to nothing on the economic side of things. Faith-based politics and right-wing fundamentalists thrive in American politics, and you will still never see a Wiccan or atheist gain the presidency. Black or women candidates need to be "war presidents" and highly business-friendly in order to get elected. Progressives are immense cowards, and you made my point when you said they are not true socialists. You are correct. They aren't even progressive in the same sense as their counterparts during the '60s and '70s are, however.

The main reason youth lib has again recently started making gradual gains is because it has not been a partisan issue since it's re-emergence.